TFP is a form of payment, images are their compensation. If images are not what they want/ need then cash payment is fine by me, but it depends on several factors, difficulty of work, their abilities, how do they naturally look. Other determining factors are if these images are for commercial or business purposes or for personal use only.

I agree but guess I should be more specific. This would be a shoot for portfolio use, theirs and possibly mine. If for some reason I would sell the images as stock then by all means I feel they are entitled to some of the profits also, but I've been told by several models that they get paid plus images when they shoot for their portfolios. I don't know how they pull this off unless they are referring to some payment for travel expenses. If it were a shoot for a client then by all means I feel they should be paid an appropriate rate and that needs to be agreed on with the client.

...but I've been told by several models that they get paid plus images when they shoot for their portfolios.

That's crazy! If that's truly the case, then I don't know how they pull it off either, but if they're shooting for THEIR portfolios, they need to be paying the photographer, not the other way around! Or TFP/CD at the very least. Geez.

Not raggin' on you or anything mediclimber, but I swear sometimes people (i.e. some photographers -- or GWCs) are just dumb.

The internet and MM and the like have changed the perception of a whole group of people to think that models are to be photographed by themselves. It used to be the model was window dressing to showcase the product. The only time they were shot by themselves was to show the product, that was themselves, to prospective buyers. So they hired a photographer (read= paid them money) to make the pictures of the product (the model).

Since there are so many amateurs and GWC's (there is a difference) who are just happy when any girl gets in front of their camera and smiles at them, they are contaminating the gene pool with the idea that the model is the "most valuable player."

My unpopular take on this is as follows. Professional photographers invest a great deal in their craft. including cameras, lights, studios, computers and software and training in all the above. To recoup their costs they provide photographic services and prints for money. Often they will create images on speculation and sell them at a later date. They need to sell their services/images for around 5 times their cost to maintain a profitable business. So to pay a model 50% is ridiculous! (NOTE - These are general guidelines) Get me Cindy Crawford nude and I will definitely give her 50% of the sales, as the exception.

Most every industry sells their product and several percent above their costs. Photography is no different or it is just a hobby. Giving away free prints can be written off as an advertising or promotional expense, just make sure the the percentages don't go above the national average or you will be "spending" too much in that section.

So a model can ask whatever she wants and if you are happy, then fine. However, you can also decline and find someone with a more realistic view of their contribution to the project and give her what you both feel is fair.

Too many people are giving the impression that photography is easy and therefore of little value and it will be hard to get that image to swing back to where it belongs. Digital equipment advances and soccer moms are all part of the problem.

It all depends on the use of the resulting photographs. TFP must be fair to BOTH model and photographer. That means PROMOTIONAL USE ONLY of the resulting images.

Fred

With respect Fred:

TF doesn't mean free. It means fair value. A models contribution is only one part of the whole picture, so even if I sell the print for $200, if $20 made them happy on shoot day, that is still perfectly fair. How do you think business afford all those employees and buildings and utility payments and so on? They charge more and earn more than their costs.

Experienced photographers have way more invested in their business than beginning models and often more than experienced models. Equal shares or promo only isn't "fair", it is just one way of doing it and poor one at that.

Let's take the example of setting up a shoot and there is $400 worth of expenses paid by the photographer. Studio rental, MUA, Wardrobe and prop rental, photo stylist, seamless paper, printing costs and so forth. Everybody gets prints for their book. Everybody is happy.

The Photographer then gets to sell one image for $200. He still hasn't broke even on the hard costs, let alone the overhead in his business.

Say two years goes by and he sells another or the same image to a greeting card company or a book jacket, for anotherh $150.00. Still hasn't covered costs. Does he have to try and locate the trio above to share more of the income and reduce his reduction of expense?

The photographer owns the copyright which states he/she is the one who can make copies for profit. Yes, model releases still matter, but that is another topic.

Sure the model doesn't have to agree to be part of the project, but if she does, it is fair. By the way in the above senario the model gets the additional benefit of having a tearsheet available to show she is actually published professionally, not just in someone's spank bank.

I find the statement " I've been told by several models that they get paid plus images when they shoot for their portfolios" to be very odd. When I shoot a model "for her portfolio", I'm usually the one getting paid. If it's a trade shoot (TFP or something) similar, then a signed release is my pay. I don;t think I have ever paid a model in cash and giver her prints, unless it was one or two prints given more as a tip.

__________________
Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats.
--HL Mencken

Unfortunatly Doug it's not too odd for this area. I do some TFP work but more paid shoots. I just offered a "new beginner" model a TFP shoot and she has replied with her requirements that include expenses, a hair stylist, a MUA, and a CD of the images. Now this young lady has several cell phone photos up as her portfolio so I figured that since she's within twenty miles of me I'd offer to help her out a bit and try to get her some good images. I thanked her for her time in reading my E-mail and told her I don't think this will work since I had no intention of getting her the MUA and hair stylist. I had a model contact me a couple months ago about a shoot. She said she liked my work and wanted to know if we could set something up. When I said shure her next comment was that she charges $50 an hour. I told her that's okay, since I charge $100 an hour she can deduct her fifty and only pay me fifty an hour. They are out there, maybe more concentrated in the PA ara but out there none the less.

I once met with a 'wannabe' and within 5 minutes she was asking about compensation. She had nothing good in her port and was 'untested'. I begged off but did suggest that I could send her names to try. Never heard back from her again.

Doug Lester talks of a few prints as 'tips'. I think this is a reasonable view. But, as with everything, tips are now 'required' no matter the service. Pardon me but if the service I pay for is not there why should I give extra?

Do you pay your waiter and also allow them to sit with you and share in your meal?